Inside The Hearts And Minds Of Arab Youth - Arab Youth Survey

[Aramagedon]

This type of extremism is present at both sides.. you are actually pointing towards some one... and that some one know it.
Secondly, you donot know what is going on behind the scenes. We here in Pakistan have captured and killed many "Muslim Terrorists" having Satanic Tattoos on their bodies. Even some Israeli Military persons are also captured few years ago.
So stop blaming Islam and muslims(specially sunnis). And stop Hasan Rohani and team to from increasing tensions with Pakistan. Up till now we have ignored every mistake by Iran, considering Iran as a brotherly neighbor. But you guys are giving space to our enemies to hit on us.


View attachment 300811
A "Muslim Terrorist" captured in Pakistani Tribal area. Probably while leaving his military base home he was sure that he will return back.

Well I didn't criticize Islam ((Islam is pure and clear from God)), I critized extremism and man made beliefs.

I Also didn't critize Sunnis, I only critized false and extremist beliefs which has ruined Islamic countries, and your country is doing good job in eliminating terrorists I hope for someday without terrorism in the world.

Problem is radical Khomeinism. I think most Arab don't care about Iran or it's Nuclear program. It's the Anti-Sunni, Shia ideology of mass murder of Sunnis for the return of 12 Imam from some cave or well that is the root cause of all the hate and bloodshed in the region. Qom is the epicentre of satanism and should be wiped cleaned.

Visit a doctor.

 

[Malik Alashter]

Visit a doctor.

Then you need million doctor to see these people other wise I believe it's to late they had it severe anxiety.

 

[Dubious]

Have you ever read a book about wahabism to know what's going on in the world?.

I dont read books which label people....The min the book tries to explain to me how you can categorize or break down Islam into sects- I know the author has no idea what he / she is talking about....

I have not heard a single Saudi call himself a wahabit before it came in the media.....Even now I dont hear them call themselves Wahabi....They may say they follow the Hanbali rulings but maybe I dont talk to people who dont have an iota of knowledge about Islam...

 

[Dubious]

This is from wiki:

you do know ANYONE can edit wiki?!
Read what I wrote:

I dont read books which label people.

If someone editing wiki does it that is their personal choice!

 

[Aramagedon]

you do know ANYONE can edit wiki?!
Read what I wrote:

If someone editing wiki does it that is their personal choice!

Ok sis there's No wahhabism in the world. I was wrong and u are right.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

Is this a topic about "Wahhabism" and imaginary "Wahhabis" where Wikipedia of all sources is used as "evidence" (I could edit it now if I wanted for instance) or are we discussing the interesting findings of this survey?

A moderator should clean this thread and remove all off-topic posts and posts that discuss religion. PDF is not a religious forum.

Anyway to repeat myself, what is today KSA is the cradle of Islam and home to all recognized sects of Islam within Sunni and Shia Islam indigenously. I know of no other Muslim country where this is the case.
No Hanbali follower that I know of or have met calls himself a "Wahhabi" and it is indeed correct that the Hanbali fiqh is the state-sanctioned fiqh as it is the most common fiqh in Najd which is the religiously and politically dominating region of KSA. However the majority of the population follow other madahib but there is no trouble among the different sects and their followers outside of a few grievances from Twelvers and Ismailis in respectively the Eastern Province and Najran but we are talking about a very small minority of people. Some Sufis in Hijaz have complained previously as well but a understanding was reached long ago.

 

[Dubious]

Ok sis there's No wahhabism in the world. I was wrong and u are right.

Extreme views like this causes labeling...READ with understanding/ recite from memory as the 1st word reveled in Islam :
I didnt say it didnt exist I said I stopped reading it coz it is useless:

.The min the book tries to explain to me how you can categorize or break down Islam into sects- I know the author has no idea what he / she is talking about..

Unlike your extreme views I didnt say people dont label I questioned it:

Why give it a label and recognize it?

 

[Madali]

Your post makes no sense. Try and read your own post again and compare it with the findings in that survey. Especially your conclusions about who "supports" IS and who does not.

I said, "Almost 1 in 5 young people from the GCC support Daesh, while 1 in 14 from Levant & Yemen support Daesh, that's a big difference. What we break it up further? "

I looked at the figure again, which is,

Over 13% agree with the statement "I could see myself supporting it". Breaking it down per region, it is,
GCC: 19% Agree
Levant & Yemen: 7% Agree

Turning into a ratio, that's 1 in 5 for GCC and 1 in 14 for Levant & Yemen. Have I misread the conclusions? It seems to match the numbers, but I would be happy if the error is pointed out, so that I can understand the findings better.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

I said, "Almost 1 in 5 young people from the GCC support Daesh, while 1 in 14 from Levant & Yemen support Daesh, that's a big difference. What we break it up further? "

I looked at the figure again, which is,

Over 13% agree with the statement "I could see myself supporting it". Breaking it down per region, it is,
GCC: 19% Agree
Levant & Yemen: 7% Agree

Turning into a ratio, that's 1 in 5 for GCC and 1 in 14 for Levant & Yemen. Have I misread the conclusions? It seems to match the numbers, but I would be happy if the error is pointed out, so that I can understand the findings better.

LOL, at the usual Iranian twisting of reality. That reputation does not come out of nowhere it seems. Did you miss the crucial "if they did not use so much violence"? That basically changes the entire nature of the question to one about whether they support an Islamic state emerging among the Sunni Arab community in Syria and Iraq. Iran itself claims to be an Islamic state and is based on Islamic law apparently.

If Sunni Arabs in Iraq and Syria want to establish an Islamic state and govern themselves, why should they not be allowed to do that, just as Iranians apparently decided to become an Islamic state in 1979? It took violence for the Mullah's in Iran to gain power, stay in power and that will also be the case in the future.

All the Shia militias in Iraq who are fighting against ISIS want an Islamic state as well just a Shia one. They have in the past been ready to fight the central government to achieve that goal, rivals from within and non-Shia's. Today they are happy because the Iraqi regime is basically run by Shia Islamists so no need to rebel especially not as ISIS and the Kurds are the much greater enemy.

I personally would find it interesting to see how a non-expansionist Islamic State would do if given the chance to prosper and if governed correctly. If numerous Muslim nations from Africa to Asia can be ruled by Islamic law why not another state? It would be hypocritical of me and you to deny them this right if there was popular support.

 

[Madali]

LOL, at the usual Iranian twisting of reality. That reputation does not come out of nowhere it seems. Did you miss the crucial "if they did not use so much violence"? That basically changes the entire nature of the question to one about whether they support an Islamic state emerging among the Sunni Arab community in Syria and Iraq. Iran itself claims to be an Islamic state and is based on Islamic law apparently.

If Sunni Arabs in Iraq and Syria want to establish an Islamic state and govern themselves, why should they not be allowed to do that, just as Iranians apparently decided to become an Islamic state in 1979? It took violence for the Mullah's in Iran to gain power, stay in power and that will also be the case in the future.

All the Shia militias in Iraq who are fighting against ISIS want an Islamic state as well just a Shia one. They have in the past been ready to fight the central government to achieve that goal, rivals from within and non-Shia's. Today they are happy because the Iraqi regime is basically run by Shia Islamists so no need to rebel especially not as ISIS and the Kurds are the much greater enemy.

I personally would find it interesting to see how a non-expansionist Islamic State would do if given the chance to prosper and if governed correctly. If numerous Muslim nations from Africa to Asia can be ruled by Islamic law why not another state? It would be hypocritical of me and you to deny them this right if there was popular support.

You are extremely defensive. I'm not attacking Arabs. I'm finding fault with the survey.

There is two main concerns I have with the survey,
1) The complete data is not given, so we can see the breakdown of the answers given per country, as most reputable polls do (look at Pew's or Gallop's). When I looked at the particular example, I showed the great variance between two regions, therefore when there is a big variation, it will be more helpful to look at the smaller details to better understand the subject.

2) The questions are not professional opinion poll questions. Your own reply supports this assertion. Your post is about Arabs wanting an Islamic state. Okay, fine, then wouldn't you agree a separate question clearly asking that would have been helpful, such as,
"I could see myself supporting a non-violent system of governance that is modeled after Islam" or something similar, without any connection to Daesh. And then another question could be "I see myself supporting Daesh", so that we have a clear understanding of the Arab youth mentality.
Remember, your own post, in the first post, starts with "An overwhelming majority of young Arabs reject Daesh (ISIS)". Therefore the survey itself is using the findings to show the youth's attitude towards Daesh.

I'm sorry if you have an obsessive hate for Iranians, nothing I can do about that, but my post wasn't an attack on Arabs. I like reading scientific opinion polls, and I'm the sort of person who looks at the complete data, methodology, and questions asked. It's nothing personal.

For example, compare this survey with the following,
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120758/silatech-index-voices-young-arabs.aspx

It's from 2009, and I didn't go through the questions one by one, but I want you just compare the way the questions are presented (no fluff, very clear) and how the results are portrayed (per country and gender). Wouldn't you consider this a better approach to understanding the Arab youth?

 

[-SINAN-]

Therefore the survey itself is using the findings to show the youth's attitude towards Daesh.

Nope, you are still trying to twist facts in order to show Arabs affiliated with Daesh....You are such a smart man Madali and everyone else are idiots....

 

[Madali]

Nope, you are still trying to twist facts in order to show Arabs affiliated with Daesh....You are such a smart man Madali and everyone else are idiots....

Please explain.

 

[Solomon2]

There were no problems between Arabs and Iran before 1979. Nor 100 years ago. Nor 200 years ago. Nor 300 years ago. Arab countries are tired -

Wow, there's a lot of shameless distortion here. Arab "countries" didn't have problems with Iran because for hundreds of years they were part of the Ottoman Empire: wars were between the Ottoman and Persian empires instead. And for thirty years after the Ottomans evaporated the region was under British or Russian domination! Afterwards flashpoints of conflict remained: the Barazani Rebellion, Khuzestan, and the status of the Shatt-al-Arab - the proximate cause of the Iran-Iraq War.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

Wow, there's a lot of shameless distortion here. Arab "countries" didn't have problems with Iran because for hundreds of years they were part of the Ottoman Empire: wars were between the Ottoman and Persian empires instead. And for thirty years after the Ottomans evaporated the region was under British or Russian domination! Afterwards flashpoints of conflict remained: the Barazani Rebellion, Khuzestan, and the status of the Shatt-al-Arab - the proximate cause of the Iran-Iraq War.

Almost the entire Arab Peninsula, half of Magreb etc. were independent states and never formally part of the Ottoman Empire. That's half of the Arab world more or less. Another thing, Arabs were the biggest ethnic group living in the Ottoman Empire and Arabs played an important role on almost every front.

In fact the Omani Sultanate ruled Southern Iran not long ago. Likewise parts of modern-day Pakistan. Gwadar for instance was sold to Pakistan by the Omani Sultan as late as 1958.





Even long before the Ottomans were relevant and Arabs ruled the entire MENA region under the Umayyads, Abbasids and Fatimids (for almost 1000 years) there were no real hostilities between Arabs and Iran. Not even after WW1 and until 1979.

You are inventing new history here due to your hatred for Arabs and Muslims.

Khuzestan is not an Arab problem nor do Arabs care. Most do not even know what it is. It's Iraqi nationalists who are interested in that province.

Arabs on the other hand care very much about your poor treatment of our sisters and brothers in Palestine.

 

[Solomon2]

Almost the entire Arab Peninsula, half of Magreb etc. were independent states and never formally part of the Ottoman Empire.

You're right: I forgot about the independent sheikdoms of the Gulf and Yemen. I was thinking only about those areas that shared borders with Iran.